Slackers In The Bedroom: Remo vs. Roger

[Remo D]

Okay, now that I've got your attention with that header, I'll have to disappoint you by just talking about movies again...

All right. Never mind the Academy Award nominations (I don't call them "Oscars" anymore--they will forever be known as "Julias" in my mind now: awards as worthless as Olympic gold medals in figure skating), but one of the films in questions happens to be a Best Picture nominee.

In recent weeks, I've seen two films discussed at length by my old buddy Roger Ebert. One he gives four stars and calls the best film of the year: IN THE BEDROOM.
"The Best Thriller of the Year!" gush some ads, as well. And I was handed a completely false plot summary from two different sources--I was told that IN THE BEDROOM involved a misdirected phone call--a noise complaint in which someone claims "I can see everything you're doing in there!" and catches hell as a result. (What the hell IS that film, anyway? It sure as hell wasn't this one.)

Nope--this is a film about devastating family tragedy, domestic abuse, lack of justice, revenge without satisfaction--you know the routine. It's an exceptionally well-made film, no doubt about it. And Sissy Spacek is just as good as you've heard she was, and so is the rest of the cast. And Todd Fields is a gifted new director. I could not say a single bad thing about the film or the skill with which it was put together. But, naturally, it depressed me. It's not the sort of thing I enjoy sitting through. It's one cold, sad movie--and whoever called it a "thriller" really ought to choose his words more carefully. There's very little suspense and even less so-called "action"--this is a film of emotions far more than it's a film of events... let alone "thrills."

Now, on to SLACKERS. Roger-Dodger gave it zero stars and went out of his way to excoriate it... it's a "dirty movie," among other insults. It made him feel unclean. It made him wish he could stand in line with people waiting for it (not too many of those--this thing's tanking all over the place) and whisper the titles of "better" films into their ears. And he really lost it over Mamie Van Doren's infamous topless sponge bath scene.

Well, after a recommendation like that, you know I was literally PROPELLED into the theatre to check THAT one out for myself.

Now, we're getting to my question for you all. I wouldn't suggest for a minute that SLACKERS had better acting than IN THE BEDROOM. Or better writing. Or better direction. Or better anything (at least, as far as serious review/award criteria go). And yet, in the middle of a stressful bummer of a weekend, SLACKERS made me smile. It made me laugh. It made me feel better coming out than I did going in.

So, in all honestly, I have to say that I liked SLACKERS "better" than IN THE BEDROOM. And when it comes to DVD purchases, I'll be looking to this zero-star movie far more quickly than I will the four-star item--Best Picture or no Best Picture.

What do you think this says about me? Be honest, now!


------------------
"Nya-nya, nya-nya, nyahh-nyahh... I made you eat your parents!!!" --Cartman

[ROBERT]

Any film old Roger gives zero stars, is a film that literally begs to be part of my DVD collection. Except Beyond the Valley of the Dolls of course.

[Griff [Mola]]

I'd like to see you two fuckers get in the ring and duke it out, mano e mano. Careful, I hear Ebert is a biter ...of the below the belt variety.